A master is not one who spends their life claiming mastery, but instead spends it perfecting their mastery. To a master, the work is never done, for there is ever greater mystery to explore. To the master, one is never a master.
"All up to and including the Christ and beyond are disciples of the one."
As soon as you cease to have anywhere to grow, you cease to grow.
I am curious, why does one have to deny their own Creatorhood to acknowledge greater Creatorhood? Why does one have to be crippled by inferiority/superiority complexes in order to acknowledge to themselves that there is yet more to experience which is beyond the current experience?
Humility isn't about above or below, superior or inferior but simply acceptance of the self as the self is. To claim only my divinity and not my humanity would be a delusion, just as would be its opposite. Only in the acceptance of both my microcosmic self and my macrocosmic self am I capable of being in self harmony. My microcosmic self is in awe of my macrocosmic self and my macrocosmic self is in awe of my microcosmic self, there is a mutual respect and yet they do not complain about this.
My microcosmic self does not complain and cry about why it is not the macrocosmic self, and my macrocosmic self does not despair at my microcosmic self, as they are, of course, simply aspects of the same self. They both understand their relationship to eachother and their foundation as the Creator, there is no longer competition between the two aspects of myself.
Does that mean they are the "same"? Certainly not, as my macrocosmic self is still, indeed, in a much greater field of consciousness as my microcosmic self and yet I know one day the microcosmic self I am now will one day be my macrocosmic self, and in that time a new macrocosmic self will be discovered and I will also realize myself as the macrocosmic self I once only saw from the microcosm and thus is my game of leap-frog with myself.
I do not see it that acknowledging that there is more mystery to explore as contradictory to being the Creator. I see it as the infinite spectrum of self, and so how can I acknowledge where I am now, and the Creator, without realizing that the self that I am exists as an enourmous spectrum in to both past and future and beyond time?
The greatest self delusion, if you ask me, is the naive belief that the infinite self has been apprehended in its entirety. This is why compassion leads to humility because there comes to be the understanding that the work is never done, the Great Work is timeless. How can you ever be done with infinity? How can infinity run out of mystery? When does activity cease and growth come to an end?
Compassion sees that all are on the same journey as the self, so for what need is there to put one's own Creatorhood on a pedestal?
Only when you blind yourself to the truth of infinity which is that endless stream of mystery, does one see themselves as Ialdebaoth, the arrogant being who looks in to the waters of infinity, seeing only himself, claiming himself as the One God while simply being ignorant of the mother Sophia. Like Plato's cave, we become enthralled with the shadows before us and lay claim that that is the universe of experience. We must crack and shatter the Orphic egg and let ourselves out to view the universe in its entirety and of which we are only a part.
The ocean is the water, and I am the wave. The water is God and I am a hand. Being the hand, I am thus God, and being thus God, I am the ocean, and yet, I am always still the wave. Why would I cut off the hands of God in order to be God? This makes little sense to me. I am just as much God being the hand of God as the Mind of God is God.
I see no contradiction between allowing oneself to be both finite and infinite, for I believe that careful balance is the middle path of the upward spiraling light. To see myself as the Creator, I must also see all as the Creator, so to say I am the Creator and there is no other is a great self delusion, for is not the other just as much the Creator as I am?
If we are all the Creator, doesn't that mean there is simply no end to self? Know thyself and all things are known. Yet, is it truly possible to apprehend an infinite self? Only by realizing that there is yet a higher turn of the spiral can we look in each direction of the Golden Mean and realize and see that we came from infinity, to travel infinity, while discovering infinity we realized ourselves as infinity traveling in to infinity and thus that there is an infinity of infinity to travel ahead.
It is this simple acknowledgement of one's relationship to infinity that, imo, breeds humility. It is one of respect and awe, for if you have truly considered infinity, is it not awesome and worthy of respect? Is it not beautiful, enough so to consider it as sacred?
Also, understanding that infinity is a unity and there is thus a compassion by which unity is fundamentally informed, I would also deduce that in order to have compassion, one must be able to put themselves in the place and position of another. How can one have compassion if there is no acknowledgement of the different aspects of the Creator?
Yes, we are all the Creator, but are we all the Creator in the same way? Rather, is our Creatorhood expressed through the exact same forms? Does infinity always take the same shape?
A circle may find intrigue in being a square and so the circle, to self-motivate, will perceive itself to have the desire of being a square and so through the intelligence of its infinity it may arrange its experiences to become a square. This does not mean the square is superior to the circle, yet the circle aspired and desired it no less the same. Is not a desire a yearning from something which is perceived to not be in the current moment of experience?
The circle in its aspiration puts the square "ahead" of itself not out of superiority or inferiority, it does not hate being a circle, it simply realizes that currently its form is as a circle and in order to realize total squareness, the circleness must be put in to potentiation that the square may be totally realized.
One may say that in the reality of the Creator the circle is always the square and the square is always the circle, but so is the circle a circle and the square a square. From the point of view of the circle, a square may be seen. From the point of view of the square, a circle may be seen. The circle may become a square and thus transcend its circleness, but the fact will ever remain of the time of the circle, and so the time of the square is no less meaningful. A square can always go back to being a circle once it has been a circle. Yet a circle that has never been a square has yet to realize its Creatorhood in squareness, it has not yet apprehended that part of the self.
For myself, I simply see it that there is still an infinity of forms and formlessness to explore and that while I may be very comfortable being a circle or a square, there are still yet shapes of the self that are a mystery for me to yet apprehend. Thus, I acknowledge only ever exactly where I am, for where I came is part of that and where I am going, only infinity knows. It is my choice but infinity has considered all possibilities so it cannot possibly ever be wrong. The mystery is myself, the mystery of that mystery is the choice. What will 'I' do?
"All I know is I know nothing."
Deepest blessings to you, my friend.
Lets just say, my being the Creator is an amusing, loving inside joke between myself and the One Infinite Creator.
I need not tell anyone in order to enjoy the fruits of that relationship with and within the Infinite Self. I need no validation from others of my Creatorhood and so I do not see any need to make claims of proof. I know I am the Creator, that is enough for me without having to preach that fact.
P.S. I see this all as an argument between the left hand and the right hand. If the hands can see they are simply extensions of the same heart and mind, there would be much less of this conflict between individual and collective.